Hey guys, been a minute since I posted. Wanted to share some results from the past month or so testing some different skills during WOH. Might be kinda dorky, I admit, but I kept a spreadsheet and entered hits/at bats while playing. Obviously I didn't track anything while I wasn't at work, or wasn't sitting in front of my laptop. But this should be a good sample size, I think.
Here we go:
Reggie Smith (late innings/blowout) bats .838 over about 400 at bats when the score is >= 4 runs. When the score gets closer than 4 runs, his batting average drops to .696 over a sample size of about 600 at bats. The difference in number of at bats may be due to a number of things, including but not limited to extra innings.
Dwight Evans (vsR/blowout) bats .824 over a sample of about 200 at bats when the score is >= 4 runs. When the score is closer than 4 runs, his batting average drops to only .782 over a sample size of about 300 at bats. Again, same reasoning for disparity in number of at bats.
So that tells me blowout turns off in WOH. Pretty good sample size there for Smith, not sure why Dwight has been more successful, but then again a bit of a smaller sample with him.
Here's a really crazy one using man-on-base, and Red Schoendeist was an excellent test case since he is double man-on-base.
Red hits .861 over a sample of about 550 at bats with runners on. With no runners on, he bats .557 over a sample of about 90 at bats. Only way you really get no runners on is either 6.10 or you hit a homerun or ground into a double/triple play, so that gives us the reasoning for the disparity in number of at bats.
Now here's where it gets even sillier, and I did not start tracking this at first so the sample is not large enough for me to say one way or another. But, it seems runners on turns OFF if you start with it on, but does not turn ON if you start with it off. Using Red in situations like on 3.10 on Monday or 4.10 on Royale, his batting average with no runners on .563 is literally almost the exact same as it is when we *do* have runners on, which came out to .571 average.
So it seems runners on will turn off, but won't turn on. If that makes sense.
Here's another good one: Hot Hitter.
Using Bill Freehan (vsL/hot hitter) he hits .653 over a sample of about 200 at bats before he gets his first hit. Then, in a sample of about 400 at bats after he gets his first hit, his batting average was .644 which is actually LOWER than before the skill is supposed to turn on.
Another case of a skill that's supposed to turn on, that doesn't.
What do you guys think? This all makes me believe that skills turn off when they're supposed to, but then don't turn on when they're supposed to. How convenient....
Comments
i think I would be more curious to see these stats of say Reggie Smith at 16/16 and at 20/16
What's your data / hits and at bats look like?
I love this thread so much. TY
I think there is a middle ground between a winnable sequence and players.
For example, I made the switch today from closing with Cooper RHP/RPH at 17/17 (who dominated Gibson all weekend, but couldn't beat him last Monday) to Mathews and today is much more enjoyable experience. I'm not watching hundreds of unhittable pitches called strikes. Cooper will now be my closer at 1.10, 2.10, 3.10, 4.9, 5.9, and now dropping him to 6.8. He kills Ryan, which I already knew.
I also tried Musial last week on Gibson and he too went Ofer. I no longer believe in blowout.
Yes, we are aware of the game having crashing issues in the middle of WoH, but we can't compensate you for the gold you lost at this time. This is done on a case by case basis. - TSB Customer Service
ive always been in the skills turn on and off camp. I notice a marked difference every time.
today I went 7/8 with Lou Gehrig as my closer. On my 6th cycle Gibson got me to two outs no runs and a man on first. Out, single, out. I came back to win that round. I don’t think that would be possible really If skills didn’t turn on.
Yes, and I totally agree. What I did was meant to be useful for WOH only.
Being a programmer myself and knowing how things like this function, I just cannot get myself on board with the idea that there’s a coin flip at the start of the round which then generates an elaborate sequence of events that ends in a desired result. It’s always vice-versa.
I just referenced the animation as it's the only hit that produces runs that doesn't matter where the runner is on base or how many runs it takes to win. The non-homerun hits that score the winning run however are ALWAYS just enough to advance the runner however many bases it takes to get the winning run home. You never see a hit that is an easy double to plate the winning run that starts on third. There's nothing random about it.
Glad he worked for you! I made the switch yesterday to Mathews as my closer with great results. I moved Musial down to 6.8. Have Cooper now at 6.9. I would have cycled a player at Gold yesterday had I put in the proper time.
Yes, I saw similar winning patterns yesterday with Mathews that I had with Cooper/Musial when I closed with them at Silver. I've played Gibson so much between Royale and HoF, that I know within four pitches if I will win the round or not. I know the sequences by heart now.
Yes, we are aware of the game having crashing issues in the middle of WoH, but we can't compensate you for the gold you lost at this time. This is done on a case by case basis. - TSB Customer Service
Nope, never a sacrifice to win. Believe me I have tried. Especially if there is a man on third, it is tied, and I'm being curved. You can tie a game that way, but you won't win.
Yes, I've had the booted win many times.
Yes, we are aware of the game having crashing issues in the middle of WoH, but we can't compensate you for the gold you lost at this time. This is done on a case by case basis. - TSB Customer Service
What about the “barely fair” homerun to end a round that has no animation?
I may may not understand what you’re saying about not scoring the additional runs with men on base at the end of a round, but I routinely get a double to end a round with (let’s say for example) runners on 2nd and 3rd. The game is over when the runner on 3rd crosses the plate, and the runner on 2nd does not advance to score. Works just like real baseball.
Also just so I’m clear- I do believe each at bat is predetermined, just not the entire round.